Consensus measures for various informational bases. Three new proposals and two case studies from political science

Consensus measures for various informational bases. Three new proposals and two case studies from...
Alcantud, José; Torrecillas, María
2016-01-16 00:00:00
We study consensus measures that quantify the cohesiveness of the information generated when a group of decision-makers express their evaluations of a number of issues. Particularly, in social choice an approval consensus measure (ACM) is used to evaluate the degree of cohesiveness in a group of agents that have dichotomous opinions on the issues. In this paper we propose three novel consensus indexes that take advantage of the specific information about such opinions: namely, the Herfindahl–Hirschman ACM, the majoritarian ACM and the weighted majoritarian ACM. To illustrate their performance we apply them to the analysis of popular votes in Switzerland and Italy. The first analysis has a fixed population of agents (the cantons) and all votes are known. In the second analysis we have a variable population (the voters) and unknown individual votes. In both real case studies, we show empirical evidence that the new indexes can be used to assess consensus.
http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.pngQuality & QuantitySpringer Journalshttp://www.deepdyve.com/lp/springer-journals/consensus-measures-for-various-informational-bases-three-new-proposals-JsZ50wEgnj

Consensus measures for various informational bases. Three new proposals and two case studies from political science

Abstract

We study consensus measures that quantify the cohesiveness of the information generated when a group of decision-makers express their evaluations of a number of issues. Particularly, in social choice an approval consensus measure (ACM) is used to evaluate the degree of cohesiveness in a group of agents that have dichotomous opinions on the issues. In this paper we propose three novel consensus indexes that take advantage of the specific information about such opinions: namely, the Herfindahl–Hirschman ACM, the majoritarian ACM and the weighted majoritarian ACM. To illustrate their performance we apply them to the analysis of popular votes in Switzerland and Italy. The first analysis has a fixed population of agents (the cantons) and all votes are known. In the second analysis we have a variable population (the voters) and unknown individual votes. In both real case studies, we show empirical evidence that the new indexes can be used to assess consensus.

Journal

Quality & Quantity
– Springer Journals

Published: Jan 16, 2016

Recommended Articles

Loading...

References

Measuring the cohesiveness of preferences: an axiomatic analysis

Alcalde, J; Vorsatz, M

On measures of cohesiveness under dichotomous opinions: some characterizations of approval consensus measures

Alcantud, JCR; Andrés Calle, R; Cascón, JM

Pairwise dichotomous cohesiveness measures

Alcantud, JCR; Andrés Calle, R; Cascón, JM

Fractionalization

Alesina, A; Devleeschauwer, A; Easterly, W; Kurlat, S; Wacziarg, R

Agreement and consensus in a q-mode research design: an empirical comparison of measures, and an application

Dijkstra, L; Eijnatten, F

National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade

Hirschman, A

The paternity of an index

Hirschman, AO

Numerical index of the discriminatory ability of typing systems: an application of Simpson’s index of diversity

Hunter, P; Gaston, M

Market share inequality, the HHI, and other measures of the firm-composition of a market

Rhoades, S

Measurement of diversity

Simpson, E

Hirschman versus Herfindahl: some topological properties for the use of concentration indexes